We are always working on that. However, we are asking our community to act as a good community. We understand that it is a relatively small group that exhibits this behavior, but if you are targeting rookies specifically you need to stop it. Now, if a rookie wanders into low sec, by all means, blow them up. But do not specifically seek out rookies for a kill, scam, gank, etc. We will be extending these rules if that behavior does not cease. Note that these rules only apply to rookies. If you want to gank a hulk miner or a missioner flying a faction fit Rattlesnake in those areas, by all means.

EDIT: Misread post, the quote above makes it explicitly clear that it is legal to can-flip, ninja, gank, etc all blatantly non-rookie pilots, even if they're in rookie systems.

With that said, can it be noted on the Rookie system wiki page that non-rookies are legal targets?

After double checking the rookie systems wiki page, there is obvious conflict between your statement and the red warning at the bottom of the page. If it is indeed legal to can-flip, gank, and ninja non-rookies in these systems, then this page really needs to be updated to reflect the actual rules. Otherwise, this page basically says that all players of eve are completely safe in the listed systems.

Good lord, please learn to quote properly. Also are you really complaining because you aren't allowed to grief rookies? Are you really that crap at EVE that you consider them targets?Numbers of terminally stupid people seem to be on the increase, I suggest we have a real life Stupidageddon to rectify this issue.

Posted - 2012.06.13 11:26:00 -
[183] - Quote
Just an idea if CCP doesn't want to new die like that with just not make it impossible to lock someone that on a trial accounts AND that didn't engage anyone?

Ex: if someone try to can flip a newb the newb will just get is stuff and leave without any consequence, if the newb is no longer in trial or if he had already engage someone then he will simply lose it's immunity and be like any other player and can be shooted

Just an idea if CCP doesn't want to new die like that with just not make it impossible to lock someone that on a trial accounts AND that didn't engage anyone?

Ex: if someone try to can flip a newb the newb will just get is stuff and leave without any consequence, if the newb is no longer in trial or if he had already engage someone then he will simply lose it's immunity and be like any other player and can be shooted

I don't think it's so much that Hek or any of the other systems are going to be re-classed as rookie systems, but that the rules set up for rookie systems will also ensure the safety of rookies who are sent to non-rookie systems as part of their NPE.

Yeah, see, that's still not the same thing, and that's where the entire problem lies:

The rookie system rule does not just ensure the safety of rookies GGv it ensures the safety of everyone. That's why reclassification of systems is a bad idea. It's also why referring to that rule outside of the actual rookie systems is a bad idea: because if we're just talking about the GG#don't mess with rookiesGG% policy, then it's not the rookie system rule. Finally, having two separate rules is also a bad idea because then it comes down the rules-lawyering about when someone is considered a rookie and not GGv that differentiation will suddenly make all the difference in these not-actually-rookie-systems.

Those are the same rules. There is no difference. You cannot mess with rookies. You can mess with anyone else no matter the system. veterans are NOT protected in rookie systems.Senior GM Homonoia | Info Group | Senior Game Master

We are always working on that. However, we are asking our community to act as a good community. We understand that it is a relatively small group that exhibits this behavior, but if you are targeting rookies specifically you need to stop it. Now, if a rookie wanders into low sec, by all means, blow them up. But do not specifically seek out rookies for a kill, scam, gank, etc. We will be extending these rules if that behavior does not cease. Note that these rules only apply to rookies. If you want to gank a hulk miner or a missioner flying a faction fit Rattlesnake in those areas, by all means.

EDIT: Misread post, the quote above makes it explicitly clear that it is legal to can-flip, ninja, gank, etc all blatantly non-rookie pilots, even if they're in rookie systems.

With that said, can it be noted on the Rookie system wiki page that non-rookies are legal targets?

After double checking the rookie systems wiki page, there is obvious conflict between your statement and the red warning at the bottom of the page. If it is indeed legal to can-flip, gank, and ninja non-rookies in these systems, then this page really needs to be updated to reflect the actual rules. Otherwise, this page basically says that all players of eve are completely safe in the listed systems.

Can flipping is specifically mentioned because it is impossible to target someone specific. If you can flip a veteran in a rookie system we will (most likely) not take action against you. But if a rookie takes the bait you better not open fire.Senior GM Homonoia | Info Group | Senior Game Master

I don't think it's so much that Hek or any of the other systems are going to be re-classed as rookie systems, but that the rules set up for rookie systems will also ensure the safety of rookies who are sent to non-rookie systems as part of their NPE.

Yeah, see, that's still not the same thing, and that's where the entire problem lies:

The rookie system rule does not just ensure the safety of rookies GGv it ensures the safety of everyone. That's why reclassification of systems is a bad idea. It's also why referring to that rule outside of the actual rookie systems is a bad idea: because if we're just talking about the GG#don't mess with rookiesGG% policy, then it's not the rookie system rule. Finally, having two separate rules is also a bad idea because then it comes down the rules-lawyering about when someone is considered a rookie and not GGv that differentiation will suddenly make all the difference in these not-actually-rookie-systems.

Those are the same rules. There is no difference. You cannot mess with rookies. You can mess with anyone else no matter the system. veterans are NOT protected in rookie systems.

Then define a rookie please.Is it a player on a trial account? How can we see this ingame?Fix FW !

I don't think it's so much that Hek or any of the other systems are going to be re-classed as rookie systems, but that the rules set up for rookie systems will also ensure the safety of rookies who are sent to non-rookie systems as part of their NPE.

Yeah, see, that's still not the same thing, and that's where the entire problem lies:

The rookie system rule does not just ensure the safety of rookies GGv it ensures the safety of everyone. That's why reclassification of systems is a bad idea. It's also why referring to that rule outside of the actual rookie systems is a bad idea: because if we're just talking about the GG#don't mess with rookiesGG% policy, then it's not the rookie system rule. Finally, having two separate rules is also a bad idea because then it comes down the rules-lawyering about when someone is considered a rookie and not GGv that differentiation will suddenly make all the difference in these not-actually-rookie-systems.

Those are the same rules. There is no difference. You cannot mess with rookies. You can mess with anyone else no matter the system. veterans are NOT protected in rookie systems.

Then define a rookie please.Is it a player on a trial account? How can we see this ingame?

Sweet jesus you people are not very bright. Lets say anyone under a month old? Would that do you? Seems reasonable enough to me.Numbers of terminally stupid people seem to be on the increase, I suggest we have a real life Stupidageddon to rectify this issue.

Just an idea if CCP doesn't want to new die like that with just not make it impossible to lock someone that on a trial accounts AND that didn't engage anyone?

Ex: if someone try to can flip a newb the newb will just get is stuff and leave without any consequence, if the newb is no longer in trial or if he had already engage someone then he will simply lose it's immunity and be like any other player and can be shooted

I don't think it's so much that Hek or any of the other systems are going to be re-classed as rookie systems, but that the rules set up for rookie systems will also ensure the safety of rookies who are sent to non-rookie systems as part of their NPE.

Yeah, see, that's still not the same thing, and that's where the entire problem lies:

The rookie system rule does not just ensure the safety of rookies GGv it ensures the safety of everyone. That's why reclassification of systems is a bad idea. It's also why referring to that rule outside of the actual rookie systems is a bad idea: because if we're just talking about the GG#don't mess with rookiesGG% policy, then it's not the rookie system rule. Finally, having two separate rules is also a bad idea because then it comes down the rules-lawyering about when someone is considered a rookie and not GGv that differentiation will suddenly make all the difference in these not-actually-rookie-systems.

Those are the same rules. There is no difference. You cannot mess with rookies. You can mess with anyone else no matter the system. veterans are NOT protected in rookie systems.

Then define a rookie please.Is it a player on a trial account? How can we see this ingame?

We are not going to define them. We say 8 days, someone will target 9 day old people. Again, spirit of the rule, not the letter. If you find yourself trying to figure out specifically where we draw the line you are obviously targeting rookies, which is NOT allowed. You decide to do this, you will find out where the line is when we warn you.Senior GM Homonoia | Info Group | Senior Game Master

Stopgap measures such as these policies are in place until a proper update to the NPE can be made. Measures that are less disruptive to the sandbox environments are being looked into.

Can baiting non-rookies in a rookie system? This is a monumentally bad idea on many levels. Dump a can outside a rookie system station or in a rookie system asteroid belt and try to convince me that the rookie you "accidentally" blew up after he poked around in your container was not an intended target. Take can baiting OUT of rookie systems! There are far more entertaining targets out there than those found in those systems. We'll keep the ruling as it stands on the wiki and act on reports as appropriate as they come in. GM discretion in these cases will apply.

Senior Game Master | EVE Online Customer Support Team | Info Group | CCP Games

Seems to cover the attitude and mental capacity of those who believe that rookies are viable targets.Numbers of terminally stupid people seem to be on the increase, I suggest we have a real life Stupidageddon to rectify this issue.

Those are the same rules. There is no difference. You cannot mess with rookies. You can mess with anyone else no matter the system. veterans are NOT protected in rookie systems.

Ok, but that's not what the rule says, and it's not how it has been interpreted in the past. I'll also refer you to this thread, where the lack of such a distinction is causing issuesGG*

edit: GG*and I assume that by pointing you in that direction, the quote used in the OP of that thread will be removed, just to add to the confusion.

But ok, if you say so. That certainly solves the issue, but it (once again) casts the rule itself in a new light.

Quote:

Can flipping is specifically mentioned because it is impossible to target someone specific.

Eh? You mean baiting, I preseum, since can flipping is very specific GGv it one individual player (or corpGG* but since we're talking rookies here, they'll be in NPC corps and therefore be on their own) that is being targeted for the trick.GG#If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GkmvGkm you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GG%

Those are the same rules. There is no difference. You cannot mess with rookies. You can mess with anyone else no matter the system. veterans are NOT protected in rookie systems.

Ok, but that's not what the rule says, and it's not how it has been interpreted in the past. I'll also refer you to this thread, where the lack of such a distinction is causing issues.

But ok, if you say so. That certainly solves the issue, but it (once again) casts the rule itself in a new light.

Quote:

Can flipping is specifically mentioned because it is impossible to target someone specific.

Eh? You mean baiting, I preseum, since can flipping is very specific GGv it one individual player (or corpGG* but since we're talking rookies here, they'll be in NPC corps and therefore be on their own) that is being targeted for the trick.

My apologies, I did mean can baiting.Senior GM Homonoia | Info Group | Senior Game Master

As long as you don't define what a rookie is, you can mention them as often as you want, without making anything clear.

Re-quote from another post:

We are not going to define them. We say 8 days, someone will target 9 day old people. Again, spirit of the rule, not the letter. If you find yourself trying to figure out specifically where we draw the line you are obviously targeting rookies, which is NOT allowed. You decide to do this, you will find out where the line is when we warn you.Senior GM Homonoia | Info Group | Senior Game Master

Let me state this very clearly here. We do NOT want experienced players to mess with rookies barely a week in. We are sure that you have worthier targets than these players who are still learning the ropes. If this behavior does not stop we may extend this rule to all systems that are covered in the Sisters of EVE epic arc. These systems are:

I do not like where you are going. Give the new people a better tutorial so they understand the consequences of their actions instead of putting up these artificial limitations.

We are always working on that. However, we are asking our community to act as a good community. We understand that it is a relatively small group that exhibits this behavior, but if you are targeting rookies specifically you need to stop it. Now, if a rookie wanders into low sec, by all means, blow them up. But do not specifically seek out rookies for a kill, scam, gank, etc. We will be extending these rules if that behavior does not cease. Note that these rules only apply to rookies. If you want to gank a hulk miner or a missioner flying a faction fit Rattlesnake in those areas, by all means.

Thank you for clarifying to 'some' people that a player flying a Hulk is not a newbie.

Can flipping is specifically mentioned because it is impossible to target someone specific. If you can flip a veteran in a rookie system we will (most likely) not take action against you. But if a rookie takes the bait you better not open fire.

I definitely understand the not-shooting at rookies if they take a flipped can, I was more concerned with the more common use-case of can-flipping, which is simply stealing to gain aggro against the owning player/corporation.

As long as it's still legal to steal from non-rookies and kill them (via flipping, stealing, ganking, ninjaing, war, or any other means) in these systems, then this is a perfectly reasonable rule. If these 25 systems are 100% safe zones for all players, then that's completely out of line and goes against the whole "no-where is safe" thing.

Can flipping is specifically mentioned because it is impossible to target someone specific. If you can flip a veteran in a rookie system we will (most likely) not take action against you. But if a rookie takes the bait you better not open fire.

I definitely understand the not-shooting at rookies if they take a flipped can, I was more concerned with the more common use-case of can-flipping, which is simply stealing to gain aggro against the owning player/corporation.

As long as it's still legal to steal from non-rookies and kill them (via flipping, stealing, ganking, ninjaing, war, or any other means) in these systems, then this is a perfectly reasonable rule. If these 25 systems are 100% safe zones for all players, then that's completely out of line and goes against the whole "no-where is safe" thing.

See the post made by GM Spiral above. GM discretion is applied here and we generally do not protect veteran players, but if a rookie gets caught in the crossfire we act accordingly.Senior GM Homonoia | Info Group | Senior Game Master

Can flipping is specifically mentioned because it is impossible to target someone specific. If you can flip a veteran in a rookie system we will (most likely) not take action against you. But if a rookie takes the bait you better not open fire.

I definitely understand the not-shooting at rookies if they take a flipped can, I was more concerned with the more common use-case of can-flipping, which is simply stealing to gain aggro against the owning player/corporation.

As long as it's still legal to steal from non-rookies and kill them (via flipping, stealing, ganking, ninjaing, war, or any other means) in these systems, then this is a perfectly reasonable rule. If these 25 systems are 100% safe zones for all players, then that's completely out of line and goes against the whole "no-where is safe" thing.

The only ones who were EVER safe ANYWHERE in EVE were the rookies, both in their starter systems and now (because some people are just pathetic and like to kill rookies) possibly the SOE Epic Arc systems as well. Everyone else, everywhere else, is a fair target.Numbers of terminally stupid people seem to be on the increase, I suggest we have a real life Stupidageddon to rectify this issue.

See the post made by GM Spiral above. GM discretion is applied here and we generally do not protect veteran players, but if a rookie gets caught in the crossfire we act accordingly.

This is completely reasonable, but this should also be clearly documented. As it stands, a player new to HS PVP is likely to come across that page and be misinformed, thinking that all players are safe there and that they will be banned if they kill veteran players in those systems. If it was made clear, then everyone knows where the line is and can act appropriately.

Posted - 2012.06.13 11:52:00 -
[204] - Quote
The saddest part of all of this is that there is a need for these rules and these threads ensue. The rules are now applied to another system because there is a group of people engaged in douchebaggery that involves killing players with characters that are less than a week old. Go off the deep end as much as you want about high sec miners and mission runners breaking and ruining Eve. But it's these people, these rookie-killing asshats, that are doing the most damage.

If I am reading GM Homonia's responses correctly f this behavior of targeting new players continues, the GMs will have to extend protections across many more systems. How far do we want to see that go? In my opinion, do not extend ANY more protections to any systems and simply perma-ban any player that targets and shoots at a rookie in any system. Do not punish the entire community because of the douchebaggery of a few. Just get rid of the few - the game is better without them.-a"Miners mine so I don't have to." ~Metal Icarus

The only ones who were EVER safe ANYWHERE in EVE were the rookies, both in their starter systems and now (because some people are just pathetic and like to kill rookies) possibly the SOE Epic Arc systems as well. Everyone else, everywhere else, is a fair target.

Even after sleeping you seem to be unable to understand anything that is said in this thread.

If you read my posts, I actually stated that rookies should be protected in these systems. The problem is that the pages that state the rules regarding these systems indicate that everyone is completely safe in the listed systems, but the GMs here are saying that this is only kinda-sorta true, and will be arbitrarily decided on a case-by-case basis.

What several of us are asking for is the page to fully explain the rules - so that it is clear that only rookies are protected (even if rookie is not explicitly defined), but that non-rookie pilots are fair game. If this is not explicitly stated, all this will lead to is even more petitions that are hashed out because some veteran in a drake got ninjad/killed in Arnon, then cried because it was against the rules, even though it apparently isn't.

Stopgap measures such as these policies are in place until a proper update to the NPE can be made. Measures that are less disruptive to the sandbox environments are being looked into.

Can baiting non-rookies in a rookie system? This is a monumentally bad idea on many levels. Dump a can outside a rookie system station or in a rookie system asteroid belt and try to convince me that the rookie you "accidentally" blew up after he poked around in your container was not an intended target. Take can baiting OUT of rookie systems! There are far more entertaining targets out there than those found in those systems. We'll keep the ruling as it stands on the wiki and act on reports as appropriate as they come in. GM discretion in these cases will apply.

Can-baiting is obviously not-cool in rookie systems, as you are basically fishing for random idiots (or noobs). The problem comes when you consider your wiki page and targeted means of getting aggro, such as ninja-salvaging, or can-flipping.

The wiki explicitly states can-flipping, which is the act of stealing a can from another player, is considered griefing. Your page literally says that I am not allowed to gain aggro against any player in a rookie system, regardless of whether or not they're a vet, or a rookie. What needs to be done is to make it clear that these targeted forms of gaining aggression, as long as they're employed on non-rookies are legal in these systems, assuming this is actually the case.

Otherwise, we can only assume that everything the two of you have said in this thread about non-rookies is completely unreliable, doesn't actually reflect the rules, and is utterly useless.

EDIT: My intent is not to be hostile to the GMs, but the reality is that if you do not clearly define this, it will only become a problem for you in terms of increased petition load.

We are not going to define them. We say 8 days, someone will target 9 day old people. Again, spirit of the rule, not the letter. If you find yourself trying to figure out specifically where we draw the line you are obviously targeting rookies, which is NOT allowed. You decide to do this, you will find out where the line is when we warn you.

When I try to figure out where you specifically draw the line I try to avoid getting banned by _avoiding_ to target a rookie. I feel insulted by your reply and have to ask you to it back.When someone burns down your sandcastle, bring sausages.

Posted - 2012.06.13 12:02:00 -
[209] - Quote
Myself...I'd like to think we could all agree that 30 days is the limit of how long someone could be classed as a 'rookie' for, seeing as, you know...rookies are also kicked out of the 'Rookie chat' after 30 days

Myself...I'd like to think we could all agree that 30 days is the limit of how long someone could be classed as a 'rookie' for, seeing as, you know...rookies are also kicked out of the 'Rookie chat' after 30 days

Like to think that to than someone flys buy me in a vindy with everytype of repper and lasers ...........

COPYRIGHT NOTICEEVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.